It's one of my biggest pet peeves, how folks from other countries don't pronounce a country's name the way the country does.

Cuba. Kooo-ba.

I was talking to a Cuban citizen in Heathrow Airport (I'm American) and when I asked where he was from he said, "Kooo-ba." Then did a mental shake, and said "Er, Cue-ba." I was shocked that my entire nation mispronounces his country's name, and he feels like he should CORRECT HIMSELF for my benefit.

This is wrong on so many levels, I can't hardly stand it.

It has been Kooo-ba ever since for me. And I listen carefully for other country's CORRECT NAME.

Ironically -- humorously -- the United States of America -- the United States -- can actually be translated into other languages, so I don't hold other country's to my own personal standard.

Have you ever heard a Southern say "Italian"? "Eye-talian." My father, with a Masters Degree in Engineering from MIT, say "Eye-talian." "High-why-yah."

My god.

Ai, ai, ai! So many!>> ^jonny:

You forgot French, Iroquois, Mexican, Cuban, Malay, Korean, Panamanian, Venezuelan, Columbian, African but oddly not Afrikaner, ... and don't forget Poland! oh... actually, I guess we never really hated them. But really, no one can forget how we hated Ourselves.
>> ^Fusionaut:
First, Americans were afraid of the British, then the Natives, then the British again, then other Americans, after that the Africans, then the Spanish, then the African-Americans, then the Germans, then the African-Americans, then the Germans and the Japanese, then the Russians, then other Americans (Commies/Atheists), then the Vietcong, then the Russians again, then the Iraqis, then the Iranians, then the Al Qaeda, then the Iraqis again, then other Americans again (TSA), and NOW they're afraid of losing electricity. (I may be missing some groups and this list may be out of sequence)
P.S. oh yeah, don't forget Muslims!

You forgot French, Iroquois, Mexican, Cuban, Malay, Korean, Panamanian, Venezuelan, Columbian, African but oddly not Afrikaner, ... and don't forget Poland! oh... actually, I guess we never really hated them. But really, no one can forget how we hated Ourselves.

>> ^Fusionaut:

First, Americans were afraid of the British, then the Natives, then the British again, then other Americans, after that the Africans, then the Spanish, then the African-Americans, then the Germans, then the African-Americans, then the Germans and the Japanese, then the Russians, then other Americans (Commies/Atheists), then the Vietcong, then the Russians again, then the Iraqis, then the Iranians, then the Al Qaeda, then the Iraqis again, then other Americans again (TSA), and NOW they're afraid of losing electricity. (I may be missing some groups and this list may be out of sequence)
P.S. oh yeah, don't forget Muslims!

Giant banks fund OBAMA more.

Why should the government have student loans in the first place?

If there were competition then there might be better savings.

But since this piece likes to cut out the middle man ( since government can do it better) then why stop at the banks. Why not let government take over every corporation / business. Then they would put a stop to greedy profits and those who pay no tax. Singe me up, I'm there baby.

Government run everything. Sounds great. Oh wait the USSR did that. How did that work out. Not to good. Ok then lets look at China, North Korea and Cuba They still got that total Government control thing going. They have a real utopia going on in those places.


I can't wait for USA to be under total government control. OBAMA 2102 all the way baby. Democrats all the way. Teach those stupid selfish Republicans and Liberty loving Tea Party fools that a government provided meager subsistence is way better than self reliance. For the life of me I can"t understand why any Cuban would risk life and swim from Cuba to Florida.

>> ^FlowersInHisHair:

Does Anonymous not realise that Guy Fawkes's goal was to install a Catholic theocracy? Kind of at odds with what they want, right?


It's not about what he was or what he tried to do, it's about the idea he represents has turned into. He's turned into an icon of anonimity and unity under that pretense.

Che Guevara, who is now considered an anti-imperialistic figure, was at one point attempting to lead a Cuban-led revolution in the African Congo.

How about when American children used to perform the Bellamy Salute during the Pledge of Allegiance?

Even the swastika had many different benevolent meanings before it was used as a symbol for an oppressive regime.

Symbols change over time and are used by people to unite under an idea, whether it be a positive or negative one. I believe the current use of the Guy Fawkes mask and what it stands for is positive.

>> ^NetRunner:

>> ^ponceleon:
Actually I have no problem with motive. I heard Ron Paul say at the debates that we are spending 20bil to air-condition tents for soldiers in Afghanistan... that 20bil is making SOMEONE really rich, so there is definitely a LOT of profit to be made in war.
I guess I should've been more clear. I agree that there's a full array of means, motive, and opportunity for Bushclan/Templars/Majestic 12, etc. to conspire to make the whole 9/11 attack happen in the first place.
What I don't understand is the way that suspicion has transformed into a decade-long attempt to prove that demolitions brought down the various WTC building. I simply can't fathom why anyone would do that, especially if you were a super-capable secret cabal concocting the entire scenario to manipulate people.
If it was an evil organization who could secretly wire the building with explosives, then why wouldn't they just pop the explosives and blame Al Qaeda for it? Why would they hire/manipulate Al Qaeda into flying airplanes into the building, and then demo the building Hollywood style? It seems like it'd be a huge risk (what if someone found the explosives early or evidence of them after?) for no apparent reward.
The buildings fell because of the planes that got flown into them. The real questions to be asking if you're looking for a conspiracy would be "did anyone seem to know about it in advance who shouldn't have?" or more damningly, "did anyone seem to disregard advance information about it who shouldn't have?"
You know, like someone who ignored intelligence briefings with titles like "bin Laden determined to strike in the US"...


Netrunner, what's your thoughts on Operation Northwoods?

Northwoods was a false-flag operation plan by the CIA in 1962. It called for terrorist attacks like hijacking planes, disguising US fighter jets as Cuban MIG fighters, and killing US citizens.

Journalist James Bamford summarized Operation Northwoods in his April 24, 2001 book Body of Secrets:
"Operation Northwoods, which had the written approval of the Chairman and every member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, called for innocent people to be shot on American streets; for boats carrying refugees fleeing Cuba to be sunk on the high seas; for a wave of violent terrorism to be launched in Washington, D.C., Miami, and elsewhere. People would be framed for bombings they did not commit; planes would be hijacked. Using phony evidence, all of it would be blamed on Castro, thus giving Lemnitzer and his cabal the excuse, as well as the public and international backing, they needed to launch their war."


The plan was on the desk of JFK and he refused. JFK was later assassinated. The following year LBJ used the staged Gulf of Tonkin incident to go to war in Vietnam. The people that questioned that incident were called conspiracy nuts. But the truth eventually came out, and it will for 9/11 also.

The point is false-flag attacks and government manipulation of evidence is nothing new. And is certainly nothing our government hasn't done before.

Ten Ways Progressive Policies Harm Society's Moral Character
By Dennis Prager
7/19/2011

While liberals are certain about the moral superiority of liberal policies, the truth is that those policies actually diminish a society's moral character. Many individual liberals are fine people, but the policies they advocate tend to make a people worse. Here are 10 reasons:

1. The bigger the government, the less the citizens do for one another. If the state will take care of me and my neighbors, why should I? This is why Western Europeans, people who have lived in welfare states far longer than Americans have, give less to charity and volunteer less time to others than do Americans of the same socioeconomic status.

The greatest description of American civilization was written in the early 19th century by the Frenchman Alexis de Tocqueville. One of the differences distinguishing Americans from Europeans that he most marveled at was how much Americans -- through myriad associations -- took care of one another. Until President Franklin Roosevelt began the seemingly inexorable movement of America toward the European welfare state -- vastly expanded later by other Democratic presidents -- Americans took responsibility for one another and for themselves far more than they do today. Churches, Rotary Clubs, free-loan societies and other voluntary associations were ubiquitous. As the state grew, however, all these associations declined. In Western Europe, they have virtually all disappeared.

2. The welfare state, though often well intended, is nevertheless a Ponzi scheme. Conservatives have known this for generations. But now, any honest person must acknowledge it. The welfare state is predicated on collecting money from today's workers in order to pay for those who paid in before them. But today's workers don't have enough money to sustain the scheme, and there are too few of them to do so. As a result, virtually every welfare state in Europe, and many American states, like California, are going broke.

3. Citizens of liberal welfare states become increasingly narcissistic. The great preoccupations of vast numbers of Brits, Frenchmen, Germans and other Western Europeans are how much vacation time they will have and how early they can retire and be supported by the state.

4. The liberal welfare state makes people disdain work. Americans work considerably harder than Western Europeans, and contrary to liberal thought since Karl Marx, work builds character.

5. Nothing more guarantees the erosion of character than getting something for nothing. In the liberal welfare state, one develops an entitlement mentality -- another expression of narcissism. And the rhetoric of liberalism -- labeling each new entitlement a "right" -- reinforces this sense of entitlement.

6. The bigger the government, the more the corruption. As the famous truism goes, "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely." Of course, big businesses are also often corrupt. But they are eventually caught or go out of business. The government cannot go out of business. And unlike corrupt governments, corrupt businesses cannot print money and thereby devalue a nation's currency, and they cannot arrest you.

7. The welfare state corrupts family life. Even many Democrats have acknowledged the destructive consequences of the welfare state on the underclass. It has rendered vast numbers of males unnecessary to females, who have looked to the state to support them and their children (and the more children, the more state support) rather than to husbands. In effect, these women took the state as their husband.

8. The welfare state inhibits the maturation of its young citizens into responsible adults. As regards men specifically, I was raised, as were all generations of American men before me, to aspire to work hard in order to marry and support a wife and children. No more. One of the reasons many single women lament the prevalence of boy-men -- men who have not grown up -- is that the liberal state has told men they don't have to support anybody. They are free to remain boys for as long as they want.

And here is an example regarding both sexes. The loudest and most sustained applause I ever heard was that of college students responding to a speech by President Barack Obama informing them that they would now be covered by their parents' health insurance policies until age 26.

9. As a result of the left's sympathetic views of pacifism and because almost no welfare state can afford a strong military, European countries rely on America to fight the world's evils and even to defend them.

10. The leftist (SET ITAL) weltanschauung (END ITAL) sees society's and the world's great battle as between rich and poor rather than between good and evil. Equality therefore trumps morality. This is what produces the morally confused liberal elites that can venerate a Cuban tyranny with its egalitarian society over a free and decent America that has greater inequality.

None of this matters to progressives. Against all this destructiveness, they will respond not with arguments to refute these consequences of the liberal welfare state, but by citing the terms "social justice" and "compassion," and by labeling their opponents "selfish" and worse.

If you want to feel good, liberalism is awesome. If you want to do good, it is largely awful.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'bill maher, dan savage, mark cuban, colin campbell' to 'bill maher, dan savage, mark cuban, colin campbell, marc maron' - edited by xxovercastxx

Tags for this video have been changed from 'Kenny Powers, K Swiss, Matt Cassel, Michael Bay, Mark Cuban, tubes' to 'Kenny Powers, K Swiss, Matt Cassel, Michael Bay, Mark Cuban, tubes, Danny McBride' - edited by blankfist

If only the Mav's owner, Mark Cuban, had as much respect for the hard work it took to get there.

I wouldnt mind knowing how many private people or corporations that are donating helicopters etc to look for survivors, surly this guy was not alone out there.

Like that Mark Cuban guy, sure he can afford to get some choppers out there.

@quantumushroom REAL freedom is being able to smoke a Cuban cigar while strolling down main street in a G string whilst carrying a Barret .50 cal for "freedom hunting".

*edit- I forgot smoking a joint while swigging whiskey.

O snap, I think everyone just got pwned! Who can we take out of context next!

>> ^jackhalfaprayer:

actually Beck here is referring to Nancy Pelosi having to shoot communists in the head to keep American office safe. [http://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments
/f5r9c/glenn_beck_61010_youre_going_to_have_to_shoot/c1dhop2] It's not better; actually i think it's worse. it's a means of veiling violent "shoot xperson in the head" rhetoric that is inflammatory, divisive, and from my own personal "slant," as it were, seems completely lacking in research or connection to reality. I listen to all sides and I find that the more I listen the more I hear baseless arguments on either side of media that I would call Disinformation with a capital D. The simple fact is that nobody in a news outlet is willing to step up and brave the political ramifications of digging into some real fact and actually changing the tides. I think Assange's current work has people scared of consequences... not to mention what may happen if all of the sudden some truth got leaked into American homes. Truths like "The Cold War is over" or "Communism was never really a threat in the first place," perhaps with the exception of the Cuban Missle Crisis- which was a total SNAFU. I guess point being that anyone who says if you find a communist in the US government, shoot them in the head- is either completely insane or is playing a part that pays very, very well. /end rant

actually Beck here is referring to Nancy Pelosi having to shoot communists in the head to keep American office safe. [http://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/f5r9c/glenn_beck_61010_youre_going_to_have_to_shoot/c1dhop2] It's not better; actually i think it's worse. it's a means of veiling violent "shoot xperson in the head" rhetoric that is inflammatory, divisive, and from my own personal "slant," as it were, seems completely lacking in research or connection to reality. I listen to all sides and I find that the more I listen the more I hear baseless arguments on either side of media that I would call Disinformation with a capital D. The simple fact is that nobody in a news outlet is willing to step up and brave the political ramifications of digging into some real fact and actually changing the tides. I think Assange's current work has people scared of consequences... not to mention what may happen if all of the sudden some truth got leaked into American homes. Truths like "The Cold War is over" or "Communism was never really a threat in the first place," perhaps with the exception of the Cuban Missle Crisis- which was a total SNAFU. I guess point being that anyone who says if you find a communist in the US government, shoot them in the head- is either completely insane or is playing a part that pays very, very well. /end rant

I bet this is what the Cuban missile crisis may have looked like on either of the receivers end.